JUDGMENT 1. - This Review Petition is barred by 4 days. 2. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the applicant inter alia indicating that the applicant was not aware of passing of the order dated 11.4.2014 and as soon as he became aware of passing of Order dated 11.4.2014 he obtained the relevant records and has filed the review petition. 3. A reply to the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been tiled opposing the condonation of delay. 4. However, keeping in view the averments made in the application and the fact that the review petition is barred by four days only, the application under Section 5 of Limitation Act is allowed. The delay in filing review petition is condoned. 5. Heard and perused the review petition. 6. The petitioner is aggrieved by passing of the dated 11.4.2014 by this Court, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the respondent was allowed and the Order dated 25.2.2014 passed by the Trial Court, whereby the evidence of the respondent was closed has been set-aside subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- and opportunity has been granted to the respondent herein to produce his entire evidence on the next date of hearing i.e. 15.4.2014. 7. It is inter alia claimed that the matter has been decided in the spirit of Lok Adalat, which could not have been decided in view of express provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 ('the Act') and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. It is further submitted that the counsel appearing for the petitioner herein was not instructed to get the matter decided in the spirit of Lok Adalat and therefore, also the order could not have been passed. 9. I have perused the judgment passed by this Court on 11.4.2014 (Coram : hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Mathur). 10. 8. It is further submitted that the counsel appearing for the petitioner herein was not instructed to get the matter decided in the spirit of Lok Adalat and therefore, also the order could not have been passed. 9. I have perused the judgment passed by this Court on 11.4.2014 (Coram : hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Mathur). 10. A perusal of the Order dated 11.4.2014 reveals that though the Court has noted that the matter was being finally heard and decided in the spirit of Lok Adalat, however having noticed the contention raised by both the learned Counsel, the Court has decided the matter on its merit by making the allowing observations "In the facts and circumstances of the case, for the proper adjudication of the case and in the interest of justice, it is directed that the petitioners shall adduce their complete evidence on the next date of hearing, which is stated to be on 15.4.2014, subject to payment of cost of Rs. . 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) to the respondent-plaintiff. It is made clear that no further adjournment will be granted to the petitioner by the Trial Court for adducing evidence in the case. Consequently, the impugned order dated 25.2.2014 is set aside and the appeal is allowed with the above directions." 11. From the observations made, it is apparent that the matter has not been decided based on any concession and/or compromise between the parties and therefore, the submissions made in the context of the provisions of the Act has no application. 12. The petitioner has filed documents running into 121 pages subsequent to filing of the review petition. However, neither the documents have been supported by affidavit nor the same finds mention or reference in the review petition. Further the copy whereof has also not been supplied to the respondents. In view thereof, the documents are wholly irrelevant for the purpose of decision of the present review petition.In view of the above discussion, there is no substance in the Review Petition, therefore, the same is dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******